There's an interesting piece over at agent Chip MacGregor's about the history of YA fiction, and what makes a YA novel different from an adult novel. It includes this tidbit: the labelling of 14-year-olds as "young adult" dates from the early 1800s.
Read the whole thing here (the answer to the third question).
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Friday, December 26, 2008
What Value Education?
Joanne Jacobs points out some interesting things over at her blog.
She points to LAUSD building an arts school for the untalented.
A quick read of the actual LA Times report shows it's less bad than that - they just allocate 75% of the slots to local residents, and don't want the 25% to overshadow the locals too much during the first year or two.
She points to various people arguing whether college is a waste of money.
Of course, the original article by Zac Bissonnette is based on the assumption that people who drop out before graduation didn't receive anything of value (or don't graduate in six years anyway). While many might tend to agree, especially when talking about Ivy league schools that practice value-free education, I personally found almost every class to be of value.
Working full-time and attending part-time, it took me ten years to get my Associate degree, and another eleven to get my Bachelor's. I wouldn't count any of it as wasted, with the possible exception of one Philosophy class that I couldn't stomach because it wasn't applicable to life in any discernable way.
One of the articles that Bissonnette points to in his article is an Atlantic article by "Professor X" discussing English 101 for adult education, and how the unnamed professor despairs that it is worth teaching, or something like that. Professor X - apparently not the Charles Xavier known by the same monicker - wanders about describing the architecture of his college and the failings of one particular student, but doesn't ever seem to come to a clear thesis statement.
There is a fuzzy one, though. The thesis, well written only from the squishy muddy nose-in-the-air point of view of The Atlantic or New Yorker, is that Professor X feels himself a gatekeeper for some qualities in higher education, qualities he feels cannot be taught to some students, although no one would or should tell that to those students because it wouldn't be nice.
My father was a teacher, though, and he never lost a student. I've been a tutor. The woman Professor X described could well have been the woman I tutored in a Logic class many years ago. She was older, and not particularly quick to learn. In any given assignment, I would show her the obvious conclusion based upon the facts presented, and she would say, "Really?", and admire my intellect and mental acuity.
Then I would tell her, no, and show her how other facts I knew could reverse the conclusions. And she'd say, "Really?" and admire my intellect and mental acuity.
Then I would say, no, and do it again with other facts, however many times I could manage it.
It took most of the semester, but little by little, the wheels got greased and she got it. Logic isn't about truth, but about how you construct arguments, based upon whatever facts you have. And how to deconstruct arguments. And how to evaluate advertising. And how to evaluate politics. And how to evaluate whatever other people call 'the facts'.
And one day I spouted off about something political, and she, instead of admiring my intelligence and mental acuity, politely took my argument apart with facts and logic. I couldn't stop laughing, because she had me cold. That moment, she stepped right up on that pedestal she had me on and told me to move over.
It was the proudest day of my life.
Don't tell me Ms L can't learn. The truth is that you weren't the right teacher for her, Professor X. The minute you decided she would flunk your class, that first day you showed her how to research at the library, you stopped having faith that she could make it.
I never made that mistake with my students. Neither did my dad. And neither he nor I ever lost one.
She points to LAUSD building an arts school for the untalented.
A quick read of the actual LA Times report shows it's less bad than that - they just allocate 75% of the slots to local residents, and don't want the 25% to overshadow the locals too much during the first year or two.
She points to various people arguing whether college is a waste of money.
Of course, the original article by Zac Bissonnette is based on the assumption that people who drop out before graduation didn't receive anything of value (or don't graduate in six years anyway). While many might tend to agree, especially when talking about Ivy league schools that practice value-free education, I personally found almost every class to be of value.
Working full-time and attending part-time, it took me ten years to get my Associate degree, and another eleven to get my Bachelor's. I wouldn't count any of it as wasted, with the possible exception of one Philosophy class that I couldn't stomach because it wasn't applicable to life in any discernable way.
One of the articles that Bissonnette points to in his article is an Atlantic article by "Professor X" discussing English 101 for adult education, and how the unnamed professor despairs that it is worth teaching, or something like that. Professor X - apparently not the Charles Xavier known by the same monicker - wanders about describing the architecture of his college and the failings of one particular student, but doesn't ever seem to come to a clear thesis statement.
There is a fuzzy one, though. The thesis, well written only from the squishy muddy nose-in-the-air point of view of The Atlantic or New Yorker, is that Professor X feels himself a gatekeeper for some qualities in higher education, qualities he feels cannot be taught to some students, although no one would or should tell that to those students because it wouldn't be nice.
My father was a teacher, though, and he never lost a student. I've been a tutor. The woman Professor X described could well have been the woman I tutored in a Logic class many years ago. She was older, and not particularly quick to learn. In any given assignment, I would show her the obvious conclusion based upon the facts presented, and she would say, "Really?", and admire my intellect and mental acuity.
Then I would tell her, no, and show her how other facts I knew could reverse the conclusions. And she'd say, "Really?" and admire my intellect and mental acuity.
Then I would say, no, and do it again with other facts, however many times I could manage it.
It took most of the semester, but little by little, the wheels got greased and she got it. Logic isn't about truth, but about how you construct arguments, based upon whatever facts you have. And how to deconstruct arguments. And how to evaluate advertising. And how to evaluate politics. And how to evaluate whatever other people call 'the facts'.
And one day I spouted off about something political, and she, instead of admiring my intelligence and mental acuity, politely took my argument apart with facts and logic. I couldn't stop laughing, because she had me cold. That moment, she stepped right up on that pedestal she had me on and told me to move over.
It was the proudest day of my life.
Don't tell me Ms L can't learn. The truth is that you weren't the right teacher for her, Professor X. The minute you decided she would flunk your class, that first day you showed her how to research at the library, you stopped having faith that she could make it.
I never made that mistake with my students. Neither did my dad. And neither he nor I ever lost one.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Friday, December 19, 2008
TWILIGHT, the cracked version
Rod Hilton over at cracked.com provides a concentrated version of Twilight -
via The Swivet
KRISTEN STEWART
Wait, we can't have sex at all, and you can't suck my blood? How can you make a vampire movie without anyone sucking blood?
ROBERT PATTINSON
It's alright, I think this movie already has more than enough sucking.
via The Swivet
Killing Children and Puppies
Okay, I think I'm goign to cross-post this one here. There was some discussion over at BookEnds LLC blog about keeping innocents alive, and I took the time to say how and when I think it works or doesn't. Here's that comment in full.
I will not continue a book after the author loses my trust.
Depending upon the tone of the book, killing a child may be the item that kills that trust.
There was a western comedy-satire, written by a black writer, with a racist white narrator and a black bounty hunter main character. It was quite funny, and the white narrator seemed like he was likely to learn something by the events in the book, chasing after his stolen wife with help he has swindled from a black bounty hunter. So I read it and enjoyed the first half.
Then the white narrator let a black child die. The book lost my trust, but I kept reading. Bad mistake.
The main challenge of the book --recovering that kidnapped wife-- was never satisfied, and the black bounty hunter suddenly transformed in the end from a realistic character to some superhuman avatar, and it all collapsed into metaphor and hyperbole.
The ending was so unsatisfying -- enough that I'd almost apply the word "racist" to it -- that I decided never again to continue reading when an author lost my trust. Killing that child meant that the author was promising something other than I wanted, and there was no reason for me to continue reading.
And, if I remembered the author's name, I'd never read another book of his that had a white character.
On the other hand, I've just completed reading "The Pesthouse" by Jim Crace, a lyrically pestilent book where he starts by telling us everyone in Ferrytown is going to die, then introduces us to a 9-10 year-old boy who lives in Ferrytown, and shows us exactly what happens. In Jim Crace's post-apocalyptic America, nature is merciless, and so are the people. Even the baby who the main character cradles through the book is at risk of its life. (...But no spoilers here...)
The difference is, that was part of the promise.
There is only one unbreakable rule: DELIVER WHAT YOU PROMISE.
In my estimate, the promise is the first 1/6 of the work, perhaps the first 50 pages of a typical novel, the first 20 minutes of a typical movie. That's how long you get to set your own rules.
After that, YOU MUST FOLLOW THEM. If you change the rules, you've violated my trust, and there's a trash can with your book's name on it.
* * *
I will not continue a book after the author loses my trust.
Depending upon the tone of the book, killing a child may be the item that kills that trust.
There was a western comedy-satire, written by a black writer, with a racist white narrator and a black bounty hunter main character. It was quite funny, and the white narrator seemed like he was likely to learn something by the events in the book, chasing after his stolen wife with help he has swindled from a black bounty hunter. So I read it and enjoyed the first half.
Then the white narrator let a black child die. The book lost my trust, but I kept reading. Bad mistake.
The main challenge of the book --recovering that kidnapped wife-- was never satisfied, and the black bounty hunter suddenly transformed in the end from a realistic character to some superhuman avatar, and it all collapsed into metaphor and hyperbole.
The ending was so unsatisfying -- enough that I'd almost apply the word "racist" to it -- that I decided never again to continue reading when an author lost my trust. Killing that child meant that the author was promising something other than I wanted, and there was no reason for me to continue reading.
And, if I remembered the author's name, I'd never read another book of his that had a white character.
On the other hand, I've just completed reading "The Pesthouse" by Jim Crace, a lyrically pestilent book where he starts by telling us everyone in Ferrytown is going to die, then introduces us to a 9-10 year-old boy who lives in Ferrytown, and shows us exactly what happens. In Jim Crace's post-apocalyptic America, nature is merciless, and so are the people. Even the baby who the main character cradles through the book is at risk of its life. (...But no spoilers here...)
The difference is, that was part of the promise.
There is only one unbreakable rule: DELIVER WHAT YOU PROMISE.
In my estimate, the promise is the first 1/6 of the work, perhaps the first 50 pages of a typical novel, the first 20 minutes of a typical movie. That's how long you get to set your own rules.
After that, YOU MUST FOLLOW THEM. If you change the rules, you've violated my trust, and there's a trash can with your book's name on it.
Friday, December 12, 2008
Catch-45
Apparently the city of Lebanon, PA has decided that actually wanting to carry a gun should be considered a mental defect, thus should remove a person's right to carry a gun.
This article from philly.com talks about Melanie Hain's habit of carrying an unconcealed pistol around town, and the reactions of various classes of locals.
In different parts of the article, the Brady Center spokesperson makes two entirely opposite arguments - first that nothing is likely to happen that requires her to have a gun, and later that by not concealing the weapon she is making herself a target and losing the element of surprise. Hmmm, what's wrong with these two arguments being made by the same person? Because if either one is true, it cancels the other as a valid issue.
More likely, the Brady Center just doesn't want Americans to start exercising their rights to carry weapons and "normalizing" the sight of an armed American. Thus, the Brady Center will make any number of incompatible arguments to get their way on the issue.
Interesting claim about state law, that I find hard to believe is constitutional -
Can't conceal it in a car, or can't possess it in a car? It would be hard to imagine how the latter could avoid violating the second amendment. On the other hand, if you can't leave it stowed in the car when you go somewhere it isn't allowed, like a bank, then that makes it very hard to exercise your rights at all. I wish Melanie Hain all the best in her lawsuit.
This article from philly.com talks about Melanie Hain's habit of carrying an unconcealed pistol around town, and the reactions of various classes of locals.
In different parts of the article, the Brady Center spokesperson makes two entirely opposite arguments - first that nothing is likely to happen that requires her to have a gun, and later that by not concealing the weapon she is making herself a target and losing the element of surprise. Hmmm, what's wrong with these two arguments being made by the same person? Because if either one is true, it cancels the other as a valid issue.
More likely, the Brady Center just doesn't want Americans to start exercising their rights to carry weapons and "normalizing" the sight of an armed American. Thus, the Brady Center will make any number of incompatible arguments to get their way on the issue.
Interesting claim about state law, that I find hard to believe is constitutional -
In Pennsylvania, gun owners are allowed to carry weapons in the open as Hain does, but need a permit to conceal them in a pocket, purse or car. So without a permit, Hain could still carry a gun at the game but couldn't take it in the car to get there.
Can't conceal it in a car, or can't possess it in a car? It would be hard to imagine how the latter could avoid violating the second amendment. On the other hand, if you can't leave it stowed in the car when you go somewhere it isn't allowed, like a bank, then that makes it very hard to exercise your rights at all. I wish Melanie Hain all the best in her lawsuit.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
News Has Cooties
Buzzmachine referred to that same Zell interview I blogged on a couple of weeks ago, and had this to say -
Have to agree on both points.
The final analysis?
(Emphasis mine.)
Zell asked the right questions - about cost structure, ego, lazy ad sales, bad business practices. The first problem was that he asked them 13 years too late (see Clay Shirky, below). The second problem is that he had no answers, or the answers he had were uninformed. And the problem for the industry is that Zell is all it had to offer as a savior - and that’s saying a mouthful.
Have to agree on both points.
The final analysis?
What saddens me even more is that we are not seeing investment to step into the vacuum. I know people who’ve worked on businesses to try to create new, online-one local news operations but they can’t get funding. I have no doubt that there is a sustainable business in local news. The problem is that, at least for the present, the current and former owners of local news ruined it. Thanks to them, news has cooties.
(Emphasis mine.)
Language Log Linguifying Lately
Over at Language Log, back in 2006 Geoffrey Pullum coined a neologism for exaggerated claims of or about language use - "linguifying".
Hmmm. To linguify claim 1 about X is to take claim 1 and construct from it a claim 2 about X, then use claim 2 in a context where claim 1 is appropriate.
Here's an example Pullum quotes:
Okay, let's find a simpler way of saying this :
Wall Street Journal's Best of the Web has linked to a recent Pullum post applying the term to an NPR interview. Pullum is highlighting typical political spin, where Condoleeza Rice observes a juxtaposition of ideas in a question and exaggerates her negative reaction for effect.
So I'll have to expand my simplified definition :
I'd also link to Taranto's Best of the Web, but they don't make it available for a day or so after it goes to the email list.
Definition: To linguify a claim about things in the world is to take that claim and construct from it an entirely different claim that makes reference to the words or other linguistic items used to talk about those things, and then use the latter claim in a context where the former would be appropriate.
I note in passing that linguifying a claim is usually (but not always) done in such a way that the new claim is false instead of true, and it is often (but not necessarily) done with the intention of achieving a humorous effect.
Hmmm. To linguify claim 1 about X is to take claim 1 and construct from it a claim 2 about X, then use claim 2 in a context where claim 1 is appropriate.
Here's an example Pullum quotes:
"Movies, theater, parties, travel--those are just a few of the English nouns that parents of young children quickly forget how to pronounce."
Okay, let's find a simpler way of saying this :
"Linguifying" is making a false or exaggerated claim about how people are using language, generally a claim intended to be taken as mild humor.
Wall Street Journal's Best of the Web has linked to a recent Pullum post applying the term to an NPR interview. Pullum is highlighting typical political spin, where Condoleeza Rice observes a juxtaposition of ideas in a question and exaggerates her negative reaction for effect.
So I'll have to expand my simplified definition :
"Linguifying" is making a false or exaggerated claim about how people are using language, often either (1) a claim intended to be taken as mild humor, or (2) a complaint intended to divert attention or close off dialogue on a touchy subject.
I'd also link to Taranto's Best of the Web, but they don't make it available for a day or so after it goes to the email list.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Steam Trek - Really!
Weburbanist had this link to "Steam Trek: The Moving Picture":
Pay close attention to the old-time piano score.
Pay close attention to the old-time piano score.
Monday, December 8, 2008
Cerridwen Press Clearance Sale
Per Terry O'Dell over at Terry's Place -
Here's the link to Cerridwen for your shopping convenience. Looks like about 8 pages at 16 per page, so there's a bunch to choose from.
Quite by chance, I discovered that Cerridwen Press is having a huge [up to 80% off] sale on many of their trade paperback titles. I don't know how long it will last, or how many books they have in stock, but ... as of 8 AM this morning, [Terry's Romantic Suspense novel] What's in a Name? was on their sale list.
If you follow this blog, you know prices on Cerridwen's trade paperbacks are scheduled for a major hike in the very near future, and since the books are printed with the price on the cover, they have to get rid of the old ones. If you're looking for a book, or want to give books as gifts, you might hurry on over and check out the sale. Where else can you get a trade paperback for $3.50?
Here's the link to Cerridwen for your shopping convenience. Looks like about 8 pages at 16 per page, so there's a bunch to choose from.
Friday, December 5, 2008
Rejectomancy Redux
Here's a link to a 1968 rejection letter of Ursula K Leguin's Left Hand of Darkness, which the following year was published and won a Nebula, and the next year won a Hugo.
AND, if you have read the book, you will honestly admit that every word of the rejection is true.
Yep. That's UKL, and that's LHOD. And many readers, including myself*, loved it that way.
The rejection is implicitly indicating that the Editor is looking for more action-oriented speculative fiction, whereas UKL's work is more contemplative and theme-oriented. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with the editor or the book, they just aren't a match.
Don't engage in rejectomancy. "No" means "no", and that is all.
*Darn, I can't figure whether that should be "including [me, myself or I]", and I don't care enough to look it up. I think that me or myself are both acceptable. Tricia?
AND, if you have read the book, you will honestly admit that every word of the rejection is true.
Ursula K. Le Guin writes extremely well. [snip] The book is so endlessly complicated by details of reference and information [...] that the very action of the story seems to be to become hopelessly bogged down [snip]
Yep. That's UKL, and that's LHOD. And many readers, including myself*, loved it that way.
The rejection is implicitly indicating that the Editor is looking for more action-oriented speculative fiction, whereas UKL's work is more contemplative and theme-oriented. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with the editor or the book, they just aren't a match.
Don't engage in rejectomancy. "No" means "no", and that is all.
*Darn, I can't figure whether that should be "including [me, myself or I]", and I don't care enough to look it up. I think that me or myself are both acceptable. Tricia?
Rejectomancy is for Losers
Over on BookEnds LLC blog, there's a recent post about how to decode an agent rejection.
Let's face it, folks, you don't. Rejectomancy is for losers.
Here's my reply -
For your own sake, do not engage in rejectomancy. "No" means "no", and so does every other rejection letter.
Look at it like dating - you ask someone out and they say no, are they really obligated to give you a list of your undesireable characteristics? Would you really want them to? Can you believe what they say? And if you did anything about it, would it mean anything at all to the next person you ask out?
This person might say "too serious", while the next might say "no sense of humour". It happens. And there's no reason that it shouldn't, because we all have different ideals for a partner or a book.
If you are looking for a critique or a review, then go to the proper venue for one. There are lots of crit groups out there. (For instance, check out critters.org for speculative fiction.)
There are also lots of pros who will do coverage on your book or screenplay for a small fee. Make sure to pick someone with industry credits and who's not on the Editors and Predators lists as a scammer. Also, figure out what kind of feedback you are looking for before you pick a reviewer. The closer you get to your actual target audience, the better.
Once you have a work that promises something in the first 1/6 of the work and delivers exactly that by the last page, then you can look at how to market it to agents. And even if it's destined to be a best-seller, it's still a "not quite for me" for 95% of the agents out there.
That's because it really isn't for them. And if it isn't for them, if they don't have that spark that makes them truly believe, then they couldn't make it a best seller. For that, you need the one.
Do the work. Keep the faith. Keep submitting until it sells.
Let's face it, folks, you don't. Rejectomancy is for losers.
Here's my reply -
For your own sake, do not engage in rejectomancy. "No" means "no", and so does every other rejection letter.
Look at it like dating - you ask someone out and they say no, are they really obligated to give you a list of your undesireable characteristics? Would you really want them to? Can you believe what they say? And if you did anything about it, would it mean anything at all to the next person you ask out?
This person might say "too serious", while the next might say "no sense of humour". It happens. And there's no reason that it shouldn't, because we all have different ideals for a partner or a book.
If you are looking for a critique or a review, then go to the proper venue for one. There are lots of crit groups out there. (For instance, check out critters.org for speculative fiction.)
There are also lots of pros who will do coverage on your book or screenplay for a small fee. Make sure to pick someone with industry credits and who's not on the Editors and Predators lists as a scammer. Also, figure out what kind of feedback you are looking for before you pick a reviewer. The closer you get to your actual target audience, the better.
Once you have a work that promises something in the first 1/6 of the work and delivers exactly that by the last page, then you can look at how to market it to agents. And even if it's destined to be a best-seller, it's still a "not quite for me" for 95% of the agents out there.
That's because it really isn't for them. And if it isn't for them, if they don't have that spark that makes them truly believe, then they couldn't make it a best seller. For that, you need the one.
Do the work. Keep the faith. Keep submitting until it sells.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
New Review up : Prom Dates from Hell by Rosemary Clement-Moore
I just posted new review for the smart and funny YA novel Prom Dates from Hell over at Abandoned Towers.
It's the first in by Rosemary Clement-Moore's Girl Vs Evil series, of which number three, Highway to Hell, will be out in the spring.
It's the first in by Rosemary Clement-Moore's Girl Vs Evil series, of which number three, Highway to Hell, will be out in the spring.
Spin, Pitch and Roll by Faith Hunter
Over at Magical Words, Faith Hunter has this to say about pitches:
Did I really just cut out the answer? Well, yeah.
It's worth popping over there to read the whole thing, especially the part after the cut. Hunter goes through four different pitches for the same novel, based upon what genre the agent/publisher is really interested in.
For those of us whose default story is "cross-genre", like me with my dragon westerns and New Weird Southern Gothic romances and YA magical steampunk romantic adventures, this is a skill we need to practice.
My pal *Mary* has been trying to get an agent excited about her Southern Women’s Fiction Novel for months. Everyone passed. She changed her pitch and the *one* agent of her dreams asked to see the whole thing, wanting an exclusive *right away*. What did she change?
...(snip)...
Did I really just cut out the answer? Well, yeah.
It's worth popping over there to read the whole thing, especially the part after the cut. Hunter goes through four different pitches for the same novel, based upon what genre the agent/publisher is really interested in.
For those of us whose default story is "cross-genre", like me with my dragon westerns and New Weird Southern Gothic romances and YA magical steampunk romantic adventures, this is a skill we need to practice.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Book Trailer Contest for Holly Lisle's The Ruby Key
Awesome SF/F author and writing guru Holly Lisle has decided to have a 3-month contest for book trailers for her latest YA novel The Ruby Key.
Each month there will be two winners, one Adult Division and one Junior Division. The Current Contest, Rules and a partial manuscript are up at hollylisle.net.
The first month of the contest ends December 20th, so if your YouTube-foo is strong, you might wish to get a move on and leave your competitors in the dust.
Each month there will be two winners, one Adult Division and one Junior Division. The Current Contest, Rules and a partial manuscript are up at hollylisle.net.
The first month of the contest ends December 20th, so if your YouTube-foo is strong, you might wish to get a move on and leave your competitors in the dust.
Monday, December 1, 2008
HMH Hold is not for Children
No, I'm not talking about a choke hold.
According to Agent Kristin over at Pub Rants, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt's hold on acquisitions is not in all departments, they still are acquiring children's books.
Good News.
According to Agent Kristin over at Pub Rants, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt's hold on acquisitions is not in all departments, they still are acquiring children's books.
Good News.
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Title Theory and Dave's Daily Kick in the Pants
David Farland (Dave Wolverton) had some advice on titles in today's Kick in the Pants:
Now, Chicken Soup for the Soul is a great example of what he's talking about. That title is created by juxtaposing two concepts. The rest aren't.
Sure, any four-or-more word title can be broken down into two or more groups. But claiming that that makes it a combination of two distinct concepts is a little post-hoc reasoning for my taste.
Perhaps I'd give him The DaVinci Code. However, that one is actually a Ludlum-format title - THE+NAME+ENIGMATIC-NOUN (The Bourne Identity, The Osterman Weekend, The Acquitaine Progression...). Dan Brown spiced it up slightly by selecting the name of a famous historical character, which adds emphasis to the name and makes it shoehorn into Dave's two-concepts concept.
Now, let's look at the rest.
The Catcher in the Rye. Actuating metaphor for the novel. Might possibly fit Dave's idea, although neither "catcher" nor "in the rye" have any standard meaning that I know of outside of baseball. The title becomes a cypher-- until the metaphor is literally explained in the text, it means nothing.
The Grapes of Wrath. Famous metaphor from the Battle Hymn of the Republic. I don't think it qualifies as "two concepts" anymore.
Lord of the Rings. It might be possible to give him this one, since the reader will ask "what rings?" But does "Lord" really qualify as a separate concept? In fact, wouldn't the second phrase be meaningless without the noun, and the noun naked without the phrase?
I think his overall point, that a title needs to draw the reader's attention and make the reader curious about the novel, is good. To that degree, I'd generally avoid titles that have been used multiple times, although you know that anything with "Dragon" in it does sell.
* * *
If you'd like to join Dave's list, then email davidfarland (at) xmission (dot) com and say "Kick me!"
Step 1: Look for words that will put two disparate images in the reader's mind at once. If you look at the title of books that intrigue you, you will almost always find that they have either two words or groups of words that form separate images.
For example:
Chicken Soup -- For the Soul
Lord of the--Rings
The Da Vinci--Code
The Catcher--in the Rye
The Grapes--of Wrath
So you want to try to come up with two words that hopefully create disparate images. Yet it's not just disparate images that make the title intriguing. The images must almost beg the the reader to pick it up in order to answer the question, "What's this about?" Leonardo Da Vinci has a secret code? Are you kidding me? What kind of code? What's going on? Chicken Soup for the soul? I'll bet that feels good! I could use some about now.
Now, Chicken Soup for the Soul is a great example of what he's talking about. That title is created by juxtaposing two concepts. The rest aren't.
Sure, any four-or-more word title can be broken down into two or more groups. But claiming that that makes it a combination of two distinct concepts is a little post-hoc reasoning for my taste.
Perhaps I'd give him The DaVinci Code. However, that one is actually a Ludlum-format title - THE+NAME+ENIGMATIC-NOUN (The Bourne Identity, The Osterman Weekend, The Acquitaine Progression...). Dan Brown spiced it up slightly by selecting the name of a famous historical character, which adds emphasis to the name and makes it shoehorn into Dave's two-concepts concept.
Now, let's look at the rest.
The Catcher in the Rye. Actuating metaphor for the novel. Might possibly fit Dave's idea, although neither "catcher" nor "in the rye" have any standard meaning that I know of outside of baseball. The title becomes a cypher-- until the metaphor is literally explained in the text, it means nothing.
The Grapes of Wrath. Famous metaphor from the Battle Hymn of the Republic. I don't think it qualifies as "two concepts" anymore.
Lord of the Rings. It might be possible to give him this one, since the reader will ask "what rings?" But does "Lord" really qualify as a separate concept? In fact, wouldn't the second phrase be meaningless without the noun, and the noun naked without the phrase?
I think his overall point, that a title needs to draw the reader's attention and make the reader curious about the novel, is good. To that degree, I'd generally avoid titles that have been used multiple times, although you know that anything with "Dragon" in it does sell.
* * *
If you'd like to join Dave's list, then email davidfarland (at) xmission (dot) com and say "Kick me!"
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Advertising and Positioning - The Test
Okay, so here's a basic question about Advertising: when your public hears your name, what do you want them to associate you with?
That's what you call "positioning". If you write horror, you want them to think scary things. If you write adventure, you want them to think fun and excitement.
That's why Pepsi paid big bucks to Michael Jackson back in the 80s, because they wanted to seem cool and hip and filled with energy. That's why Pepsi stopped paying Jackson in the 90s, because they didn't want to seem icky and freakish.
Now, I ask you, who wants to advertise on a math test?
Hmmm. Who wants to associate themselves in YA minds as related to...um... pain?
Joanne Jacobs, who writes and blogs on education-related subject, notes that the answer for a San Diego-area school teacher who sells advertising on his tests and quizzes appears to be - an orthodontist.
Is that funny or what?
That's what you call "positioning". If you write horror, you want them to think scary things. If you write adventure, you want them to think fun and excitement.
That's why Pepsi paid big bucks to Michael Jackson back in the 80s, because they wanted to seem cool and hip and filled with energy. That's why Pepsi stopped paying Jackson in the 90s, because they didn't want to seem icky and freakish.
Now, I ask you, who wants to advertise on a math test?
Hmmm. Who wants to associate themselves in YA minds as related to...um... pain?
Joanne Jacobs, who writes and blogs on education-related subject, notes that the answer for a San Diego-area school teacher who sells advertising on his tests and quizzes appears to be - an orthodontist.
Is that funny or what?
Monday, November 24, 2008
Eleemosynary vs Secular and Times vs Tribunes
Media Bistro's Fish Bowl New York feature points to a Portfolio.com Interview with Sam Zell, who recently purchased the Tribune Company, parent company of the Los Angeles Times, Baltimore Sun and Boston Tribune, among others.
Zell talks about trends in the newspaper business in very blunt (ie money) terms, and Media Bistro PULLS this juicy quote about Pulitzers:
What Media Bistro DID NOT include is the next four sentences from the interview that finished the above thought:
Read the whole interview. Zell is clearly rethinking the whole business, which is good. I won't say he's coming to all the right conclusions, but when the industry is eroding in the double digits, everything has to be on the table to save it.
If you're wondering about the blog entry title, eleemosynary is a word Zell uses for what he isn't - a charity.
Zell talks about trends in the newspaper business in very blunt (ie money) terms, and Media Bistro PULLS this juicy quote about Pulitzers:
I haven't figured out how to cash in a Pulitzer Prize. There was a day when a newspaper put "Winner of Pulitzer Prize" on the front page, and people flocked to read the Pulitzer Prize story. Unfortunately, I'm not sure that that's the case today But I also think that there are scale issues. In other words, I think that if the goal is a Pulitzer, it's in the wrong place. In other words, we're not in the business of, in effect, underwriting writers for the future. We're a business that, in effect, has a bottom line. So as far as we're concerned, I think Pulitzers are terrific, but Pulitzers should be the cream on the top of the coffee. They shouldn't be the grounds. And I think there are a lot of scenarios in the newspaper industry where the entire focus is on Pulitzers.
What Media Bistro DID NOT include is the next four sentences from the interview that finished the above thought:
The entire focus is on becoming an international correspondent. I mean, I know that because our newspaper sent somebody to Kabul to cover the "Afghan Idol Show." Now, I know Idol is the No. 1 TV program in the world, but do my readers really want a firsthand report on what this broad looked like who won the "Afghan Idol" Show"? Is that news?
Read the whole interview. Zell is clearly rethinking the whole business, which is good. I won't say he's coming to all the right conclusions, but when the industry is eroding in the double digits, everything has to be on the table to save it.
If you're wondering about the blog entry title, eleemosynary is a word Zell uses for what he isn't - a charity.
Late Bloomers
The living Scotsman posts a top-ten list of Late Flowering Debut Novelists - people whose first novel was published "late in life", with the youngest on the list being nearly fifty at time of first publication.
Compare, as well, this strange piece in New Yorker first claiming, then debunking, the idea that genius has something to do with age. It also states some interesting theory on different kinds of creativity that bloom early or late:
and
Compare, as well, this strange piece in New Yorker first claiming, then debunking, the idea that genius has something to do with age. It also states some interesting theory on different kinds of creativity that bloom early or late:
Mark Twain was the same way. Galenson quotes the literary critic Franklin Rogers on Twain’s trial-and-error method: “His routine procedure seems to have been to start a novel with some structural plan which ordinarily soon proved defective, whereupon he would cast about for a new plot which would overcome the difficulty, rewrite what he had already written, and then push on until some new defect forced him to repeat the process once again.” Twain fiddled and despaired and revised and gave up on “Huckleberry Finn” so many times that the book took him nearly a decade to complete. The Cézannes of the world bloom late not as a result of some defect in character, or distraction, or lack of ambition, but because the kind of creativity that proceeds through trial and error necessarily takes a long time to come to fruition.
and
On the road to great achievement, the late bloomer will resemble a failure: while the late bloomer is revising and despairing and changing course and slashing canvases to ribbons after months or years, what he or she produces will look like the kind of thing produced by the artist who will never bloom at all. Prodigies are easy. They advertise their genius from the get-go. Late bloomers are hard. They require forbearance and blind faith. (Let’s just be thankful that Cézanne didn’t have a guidance counsellor in high school who looked at his primitive sketches and told him to try accounting.) Whenever we find a late bloomer, we can’t but wonder how many others like him or her we have thwarted because we prematurely judged their talents. But we also have to acccept that there’s nothing we can do about it. How can we ever know which of the failures will end up blooming?
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Rooting For the Terminator
Over at Varkat's journal, there's an interesting piece by Tor Romance author Patti O'Shea
She says "No One Roots for the Terminator..."
The point is quite well made.
Her later example from one of her own books also illustrates what I think of as a universal truth - every advantage is a disadvantage, every character strength is a weakness, and vice versa.
To a character with a hammer, everything seems like a nail. Sometimes that's useful, like when the something is a snake that's attacking you. Sometimes that's disastrous, like when the something is a crystal vase that your spouse gave you.
Any time that you can take what looks like a strength, and use it against your character, you will please your audience. And that's what it's all about, isn't it?
She says "No One Roots for the Terminator..."
One of the biggest mistakes I think writers make is that when they write a kick-butt character, they create a kind of softened version of the terminator. Or in an effort to add some vulnerability, they'll give the hero or heroine an issue to deal with, but if it can be pulled out of the story without impacting the scenes or the character, then it's not a real complication.
The point is quite well made.
Her later example from one of her own books also illustrates what I think of as a universal truth - every advantage is a disadvantage, every character strength is a weakness, and vice versa.
To a character with a hammer, everything seems like a nail. Sometimes that's useful, like when the something is a snake that's attacking you. Sometimes that's disastrous, like when the something is a crystal vase that your spouse gave you.
Any time that you can take what looks like a strength, and use it against your character, you will please your audience. And that's what it's all about, isn't it?
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Zen and the Art of Convention Footwear
A friend pointed out an article by Dan Simmons on Zen and the Art of Writing Well. I'm not sure that a writer would get anything out of it, unless he/she already knew quite a bit about zen. On the other hand, there is an interesting part late in the article on Simmons' prescription for writers who have no empathy for their cardboard villains -
Hmmm. Well, I think that's a bit harsh...
But here's my own little Zen story -
Zen and the Art of Convertion Footwear
Once, Joshu left the monastery to go to a writer's convention in Kyoto. There, he found the head monk Nansen in the back of the main hall, snoring deeply. Joshu, noting Nansen's inattention, decided to play a trick.
Joshu removed the head monk's sandals and replaced them with black pumps, then painted Nansen's face with Goth makeup. He hurried home to await the results.
Hours later, Joshu was trembling with suppressed humor when the head monk returned to the monastery shortly before dawn. Nansen entered, still wearing the makeup and shoes, and set about his daily routine. The other monks came and went, apparently oblivious to Nansen's change in attire.
Finally, when the evening meal came around, Joshu could hold his humor no longer, and asked, "Master, I am puzzled. What does white makeup and black shoes reveal about the Buddha-nature?"
"Kwatz" said Nansen, clouting Joshu on the head. "Only the lack of a matching belt."
If you’re a great African-American novelist who cannot see into the human soul of a white man or woman because all you see is racism and historical inequity, quit writing fiction. If you’re John Steinbeck who knows every niche in the human heart of the displaced and powerless Oakies but has no clue as to the thoughts and feelings of the lettuce-growers and ranchers, admit defeat and do not publish fiction. (Or, if published, have your ghost call back the books and have them posthumously pulped.) If you have received the Nobel Prize for your sympathetic fiction-portrayal of the Oppressed and Downtrodden in South Africa but have no real understanding of why the landowner grandsons and granddaughters of colonists acted and thought as they did, pack it in. If you’re the screenwriter who drove Thelma and Louise triumphantly over the cliff of the Grand Canyon in a world where all men be slime, rent a Cadillac and go thou and do likewise.
Hmmm. Well, I think that's a bit harsh...
But here's my own little Zen story -
Zen and the Art of Convertion Footwear
Once, Joshu left the monastery to go to a writer's convention in Kyoto. There, he found the head monk Nansen in the back of the main hall, snoring deeply. Joshu, noting Nansen's inattention, decided to play a trick.
Joshu removed the head monk's sandals and replaced them with black pumps, then painted Nansen's face with Goth makeup. He hurried home to await the results.
Hours later, Joshu was trembling with suppressed humor when the head monk returned to the monastery shortly before dawn. Nansen entered, still wearing the makeup and shoes, and set about his daily routine. The other monks came and went, apparently oblivious to Nansen's change in attire.
Finally, when the evening meal came around, Joshu could hold his humor no longer, and asked, "Master, I am puzzled. What does white makeup and black shoes reveal about the Buddha-nature?"
"Kwatz" said Nansen, clouting Joshu on the head. "Only the lack of a matching belt."
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Myths About YA (?)
Over on the Swivet, guest Courtney Summers blogs about some myths about YA.
Honestly, I don't know that these beliefs are common and I don't know that they are totally wrong, either.
For instance, to what degree can you swear in a YA novel? In any novel?
I find swearing, by which I mean the literal depiction of particular swear words, to be intrusive and to negatively affect my reading experience. Sure, most people swear, but most people poop, and most people pick their noses, and that's just to get started, eh? We don't generally show pooping in stories, at least not as much as we actually do, because it's pretty boring and icky. So is swearing.
The question is, what function does it perform in the story? I'm not really talking about an occasional "Damn", I'm talking pervasive f_ing foulmouthedness. Hollywood types think it makes their show "edgy", or gets them the coveted PG-13 rather than the PG the story would deserve without the gratuitous nastiness.
In any case, I'm not sure that anyone believes you can't get away with gratuitous swearing, sex, drugs etc in YA, since clearly there are books that do.
I'm also not sure that you actually can get away with them, since they are so easy to do wrong, and if you do do them wrong, your book will not sell to libraries and will die a sad, lonely death.
My suggestion - write an awesome story, where the characters are so frelling fascinating that the reader won't notice that they aren't shagging each other and vomiting meaningless epithets and imbibing mild organic poisons.
Do that, and don't worry about the myths - you'll become a legend.
Honestly, I don't know that these beliefs are common and I don't know that they are totally wrong, either.
For instance, to what degree can you swear in a YA novel? In any novel?
I find swearing, by which I mean the literal depiction of particular swear words, to be intrusive and to negatively affect my reading experience. Sure, most people swear, but most people poop, and most people pick their noses, and that's just to get started, eh? We don't generally show pooping in stories, at least not as much as we actually do, because it's pretty boring and icky. So is swearing.
The question is, what function does it perform in the story? I'm not really talking about an occasional "Damn", I'm talking pervasive f_ing foulmouthedness. Hollywood types think it makes their show "edgy", or gets them the coveted PG-13 rather than the PG the story would deserve without the gratuitous nastiness.
In any case, I'm not sure that anyone believes you can't get away with gratuitous swearing, sex, drugs etc in YA, since clearly there are books that do.
I'm also not sure that you actually can get away with them, since they are so easy to do wrong, and if you do do them wrong, your book will not sell to libraries and will die a sad, lonely death.
My suggestion - write an awesome story, where the characters are so frelling fascinating that the reader won't notice that they aren't shagging each other and vomiting meaningless epithets and imbibing mild organic poisons.
Do that, and don't worry about the myths - you'll become a legend.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Andy Meisenheimer on Show and Tell
As a guest blogger on Rachelle Gardner's Blog, Zondervan fiction editor Andy Meisenheimer gives this and more on Show versus Tell:
Down in the comments, he adds this:
So he's using "Tell" to include viewpoint attitude or tone, rather than just being a level of detail or summary in the writing.
Interesting.
[Showing is...] Letting the audience put together the clues; presenting simply a sensory experience through the lenses of a character’s viewpoint. Passing no judgment, but allowing the characters to speak for themselves.
Down in the comments, he adds this:
Telling can be very useful. Think about when you tell a story to a friend over coffee. "So, my brother, right? He's totally paranoid. Get this--yesterday..." And instead of showing me paranoid, you told it to me, but that's the only way to make the following story funny or interesting or whatever. Telling is usually reflective of your point of view character.
So he's using "Tell" to include viewpoint attitude or tone, rather than just being a level of detail or summary in the writing.
Interesting.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Your Favorite Author Intrusion
"Author intrusion" is a phrase most often used for writings where the author puts his own, barely-disguised opinions like political infodumps where suddenly the narrator will pontificate about, oh,
You know, important stuff.
STOP THE STORY THIS IS IMPORTANT STUFF!
So, what's your favorite author intrusion?
- why a world where only the (ex-)soldiers can vote is THE CORRECT WAY TO RUN A SOCIETY-- kaff Heinlein kaff kaff -- or
- why there is NEVER SUCH A THING AS VALUE ADDED BY GROUP ACTIVITY-- kaff kaff Ayn Rand kaff.
- Why girls have cooties and should be avoided.
You know, important stuff.
STOP THE STORY THIS IS IMPORTANT STUFF!
So, what's your favorite author intrusion?
Economy The New Terror?
No, that's not a political manifesto (thank god).
Smita Jain (author of the new book Kkrishnaa's Konfessions)
asks here
For some reason I couldn't leave a comment there, so here's my thoughts -
(1) For suspense you need a villain. Who is the antagonist in an economic suspense novel? Another corporation? Been there, done that.
(2) Remember that publication is on a two year delay, more or less. A story keyed to an economic environment rapidly becomes dated (although economies do cycle).
(3) It doesn't work to write about what everyone else is writing about. Just write what you think people would actually enjoy reading, especially people like yourself.
(4) I believe that upbeat stories are more likely to be successful in the coming climate, but that's just an educated guess.
Smita Jain (author of the new book Kkrishnaa's Konfessions)
asks here
For example, many thriller writers almost went out of business after the end of the cold war between the USA and USSR. Till they found terror. Perhaps it is time to think the same economically?
For some reason I couldn't leave a comment there, so here's my thoughts -
(1) For suspense you need a villain. Who is the antagonist in an economic suspense novel? Another corporation? Been there, done that.
(2) Remember that publication is on a two year delay, more or less. A story keyed to an economic environment rapidly becomes dated (although economies do cycle).
(3) It doesn't work to write about what everyone else is writing about. Just write what you think people would actually enjoy reading, especially people like yourself.
(4) I believe that upbeat stories are more likely to be successful in the coming climate, but that's just an educated guess.
Defining Love
Okay, this one got to me.
From Cara Putman's Blog The Law, Books and Life
Hat tip Timothy Fish.
From Cara Putman's Blog The Law, Books and Life
A four year old child whose next door neighbor was an elderly gentleman who had recently lost his wife.
Upon seeing the man cry, the little boy went into the old gentleman's yard, climbed onto his lap, and just sat there.
When his Mother asked what he had said to the neighbor, the little boy said,
'Nothing, I just helped him cry'
Hat tip Timothy Fish.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Regrowing Body Parts a Reality?
SF Girl reports that the U.S. Army has announced progress in actually regrowing body Parts using somethign referred to as a "nano-scaffold" . Apparently came from a report in the Vancouver Sun.
Listed in various contexts in the story are regrowing fingertips, bladders, even a uterus.
Strange New world, indeed.
The technology works by placing a very fine apparatus called a scaffold, which is made of polymer fibres hundreds of times finer than a human hair, in place of a missing limb or damaged organ. The scaffold acts as a guide for cells to grab onto so they can begin to rebuild missing bones and tissue. The tissue grows through tiny holes in the scaffold, in the same way a vine snakes its way up a trellis.
...
The military plans to announce the breakthrough at the 26th Army Science Conference - which attracts more than 1,600 international military scientists - in Florida next month.
Listed in various contexts in the story are regrowing fingertips, bladders, even a uterus.
Strange New world, indeed.
Vampire Kits, Fairy Lamps, Southern Gothic
Cool circa 1800 Vampire Killing Kit just came up for auction. I blogged it over on Abandoned Towers.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Recessions and Writers
Lit soup has an interesting piece listing points why recessions are good for aspiring writers.
Of course, all of these points simply amount to "What else do you have to do for the next year anyway?"
Of course, all of these points simply amount to "What else do you have to do for the next year anyway?"
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Explaining to Do
Galleycat reports that Seinfeld is getting $7 million (and up) bids for a new book proposal. According to sources quoted in the New York Observer, "whoever ends up winning is going to have some explaining to do."
Yeah.
Oh, and $2.5 million for Sarah Silverman, who according to wikipedia is a sort of Jewish female Andrey Dice Clay. Who'da thunk it?
Yeah.
Oh, and $2.5 million for Sarah Silverman, who according to wikipedia is a sort of Jewish female Andrey Dice Clay. Who'da thunk it?
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Unlikeable Characters
Hat tip to The Swivet for pointing out the discussion of Unlikeable Characters over on BookEnds LLC.
The comments are quite interesting, mentioning the "Save the Cat" strategy and, of course, the TV character House.
I'd add the personal fact that, given a truly unlikeable narrator or MC, I'm likely to stop reading even if I'm interested in the plot or mystery or whatever. Cory Doctorow's award-winning Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom - which you can download for free here - lost me because the main character was annoying, insane and stupid, even though the milieu and the mystery were fascinating.
Neil Gaiman's Anansi Boys nearly lost me for similar reasons.
For me, I won't spend six hours with someone unless I'd enjoy, um, spending six hours with them. Life's too short to read bad books.
On the other hand, there are lots of books I've read and loved, that I currently can't stand. Mark Twain comes to mind. It's entirely possible that someday I'll come back and read Magic Kingdom and absolutely love it. And in any case, I'd happily pay full price to see the movie.
The comments are quite interesting, mentioning the "Save the Cat" strategy and, of course, the TV character House.
I'd add the personal fact that, given a truly unlikeable narrator or MC, I'm likely to stop reading even if I'm interested in the plot or mystery or whatever. Cory Doctorow's award-winning Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom - which you can download for free here - lost me because the main character was annoying, insane and stupid, even though the milieu and the mystery were fascinating.
Neil Gaiman's Anansi Boys nearly lost me for similar reasons.
For me, I won't spend six hours with someone unless I'd enjoy, um, spending six hours with them. Life's too short to read bad books.
On the other hand, there are lots of books I've read and loved, that I currently can't stand. Mark Twain comes to mind. It's entirely possible that someday I'll come back and read Magic Kingdom and absolutely love it. And in any case, I'd happily pay full price to see the movie.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Food Meme
From Squidoo's Food meme.
Are you a good cook? Very.
What is your speciality? Chicken Gumbo.
What was the last meal you ate? Pasta with ground turkey marinara sauce. Raw carrots. Braeburn apples dribbled with Menifee County molasses. Promised land 2% milk.
Last night was a venison lentil stew with garam masala and curry seasonings. The fresh venison was courtesy of a generous cousin's hunt on Sunday.
Do you eat breakfast? Yes, EVERY day.
Name a food you dislike? Liver, sea urchin, anything horribly fatty, anything really fishy tasting. Haggis isn't all that bad, though.
What is your favorite fast food restaurant? Chick-fil-A. Also Panera Bread Company, which isn't strictly fast food but has drive through sandwiches that are awesome.
Where do you like to eat with friends? Friends make any food and any place better.
Hmm. Picnic on a gazebo in the rain sounds nice.
Pancakes or French toast? Belgian waffles, actually. But both of those are good, too.
Are you a coffee drinker? Or tea? Both! If you went through my pantry and freezer, you'd find at least 6 different coffees and 25 different teas.
How do you like your eggs? As quiche. Also, I keep hard-boiled eggs on hand for snacks (throw away the yolk and the white is only 25 calories).
I also make a breakfast dish from eggs, rice, vegetables, fresh basil and any available breakfast meat. It's vaguely related to Chinese fried rice.
What kind of jam do you like on your peanut butter sandwich? Strawberry, blueberry or raspberry.
What's your favorite ice-cream? Butter Brickle.
If someone surprised you with a meal, what would please you most? Most impressive would be Lobster Thermidor. But anything that showed a little creativity and a little effort would be sweet-- I'm really not that hard to please.
Are you a good cook? Very.
What is your speciality? Chicken Gumbo.
What was the last meal you ate? Pasta with ground turkey marinara sauce. Raw carrots. Braeburn apples dribbled with Menifee County molasses. Promised land 2% milk.
Last night was a venison lentil stew with garam masala and curry seasonings. The fresh venison was courtesy of a generous cousin's hunt on Sunday.
Do you eat breakfast? Yes, EVERY day.
Name a food you dislike? Liver, sea urchin, anything horribly fatty, anything really fishy tasting. Haggis isn't all that bad, though.
What is your favorite fast food restaurant? Chick-fil-A. Also Panera Bread Company, which isn't strictly fast food but has drive through sandwiches that are awesome.
Where do you like to eat with friends? Friends make any food and any place better.
Hmm. Picnic on a gazebo in the rain sounds nice.
Pancakes or French toast? Belgian waffles, actually. But both of those are good, too.
Are you a coffee drinker? Or tea? Both! If you went through my pantry and freezer, you'd find at least 6 different coffees and 25 different teas.
How do you like your eggs? As quiche. Also, I keep hard-boiled eggs on hand for snacks (throw away the yolk and the white is only 25 calories).
I also make a breakfast dish from eggs, rice, vegetables, fresh basil and any available breakfast meat. It's vaguely related to Chinese fried rice.
What kind of jam do you like on your peanut butter sandwich? Strawberry, blueberry or raspberry.
What's your favorite ice-cream? Butter Brickle.
If someone surprised you with a meal, what would please you most? Most impressive would be Lobster Thermidor. But anything that showed a little creativity and a little effort would be sweet-- I'm really not that hard to please.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Back It Up
JA Konrath over at A Newbie's Guide to Publishing reminds all authors to back up their stuff, repeatedly and consistently, because the alternative isn't pretty.
Yeah, I really ought to do that.
Yep, sure should.
Yeah, I really ought to do that.
Yep, sure should.
Sunday, November 9, 2008
Maria Snyder on Show and Tell
Lots of authors have written on this particular item, but I really like Maria V Snyder's take on the subject. In particular, she talks about exactly how to show things.
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Memory of Elephants
Okay, so I was researching a particular phrase, to make sure I got it right in an homage, and I ran across Denise McCune's List of
Top Ten Favorite SF Short Stories, most of which I agreed with wholeheartedly, and some of which I now have to hunt down.
She has a link to Spider Robinson's Hugo-award-winning "Melancholy Elephants", which I immediately devoured and suffered through. Chills and agony and unnamed emotions. Awesome scary work. Go read it.
Something that needs to be repeated over and over to hard-SF writers: It isn't the technology, it's the people.
And I'll also repeat my personal definition of "hero" - someone who sees what needs to be done and does it, regardless of the personal cost. No cost, no hero.
Top Ten Favorite SF Short Stories, most of which I agreed with wholeheartedly, and some of which I now have to hunt down.
She has a link to Spider Robinson's Hugo-award-winning "Melancholy Elephants", which I immediately devoured and suffered through. Chills and agony and unnamed emotions. Awesome scary work. Go read it.
Something that needs to be repeated over and over to hard-SF writers: It isn't the technology, it's the people.
And I'll also repeat my personal definition of "hero" - someone who sees what needs to be done and does it, regardless of the personal cost. No cost, no hero.
A Matter of Style
Over at Bookends, Gina Robinson has some important things to say about finding your voice.
Personally, I don't think that writers necessarily have only one voice. Some do, like Isaac Asimov or Jack Kerouac or Raymond Chandler. Some don't. For instance, I would argue that Sylvia Louise Engdahl has three distinct voices in Enchantress from the Stars, each as beautiful and worthy as the others.
Likewise, each of us has many voices we use in our daily lives: parent, employee, supervisor, child, parishioner, confidante. Why would we not have many voices as writers?
It's similar to the difference between a character actor and ... blagh, I can't find the opposite term... an actor with range? A "character actor" plays the same kind of roles, over and over and over, like Adam Sandler or Gary Cooper. Other kinds of actors are much harder to pigeonhole, like William H Macy or Peter Ustinov.
Now, admittedly, I am a beginner in terms of authorship. However, I think of voice more often as finding the voice of a particular character or story, rather than my voice. But what Gina Robinson says is very important, because it is a sign to finding which of your natural voices will work for your target audiences.
Go there. Enjoy.
Personally, I don't think that writers necessarily have only one voice. Some do, like Isaac Asimov or Jack Kerouac or Raymond Chandler. Some don't. For instance, I would argue that Sylvia Louise Engdahl has three distinct voices in Enchantress from the Stars, each as beautiful and worthy as the others.
Likewise, each of us has many voices we use in our daily lives: parent, employee, supervisor, child, parishioner, confidante. Why would we not have many voices as writers?
It's similar to the difference between a character actor and ... blagh, I can't find the opposite term... an actor with range? A "character actor" plays the same kind of roles, over and over and over, like Adam Sandler or Gary Cooper. Other kinds of actors are much harder to pigeonhole, like William H Macy or Peter Ustinov.
Now, admittedly, I am a beginner in terms of authorship. However, I think of voice more often as finding the voice of a particular character or story, rather than my voice. But what Gina Robinson says is very important, because it is a sign to finding which of your natural voices will work for your target audiences.
Go there. Enjoy.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Buy a Book
Moonrat, over at Editorial Ass, gives you a great excuse to go out and buy a book this weekend. To save the entire industry.
C[r]ash Flow (Or What Went Wrong in October in Book Publishing)
Read it. Then go buy a book.
C[r]ash Flow (Or What Went Wrong in October in Book Publishing)
Read it. Then go buy a book.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Show and Tell
Lots of people write about "Show vs Tell". It's a good concept to be aware of, but it should be and in the phrase, not vs.
What do I mean?
Well, let's start with being honest. If you write prose, it's all tell. Except for little visual tricks, illustrations, doodles, perhaps visual page layouts when you are describing a sign, or other modifications of form- except for those, everything you are doing is telling.
Everything is telling.
It isn't so in movies, where almost everything should be visual, but in prose, everything is telling. Even when you go so far towards subtle detail as Raymond Chandler's "A line showed on her jaw", you are still just telling about the line on the jaw. Okay, Chandler didn't tell that she was angry, he told a detail that allows the reader to infer two levels - that her jaw muscle was tightening, and that it was anger that made it happen.
But it's all tell.
The question is, what level of detail are you telling? Is the level of detail appropriate to your story and your audience?
Look at the following sentence, and then decide whether it is showing or telling.
Well?
If you've fallen for the "Show vs Tell" fad, you probably said "tell."
Nope.
The correct answer depends upon context. It is impossible to know without seeing the scene and the surrounding phrasing. Look at it in the following paragraph:
In this case, "John loved Marsha" is a detail regarding the current emotional situation in the family. If you buy the "show vs tell" concept, it is a "show" statement.
Really, any sentence or detail can be a "tell" at one level, while it is a "show" at the next higher hierarchical level. The proper question is, what layer of detail is appropriate to the audience and the purpose of the scene?
More later.
What do I mean?
Well, let's start with being honest. If you write prose, it's all tell. Except for little visual tricks, illustrations, doodles, perhaps visual page layouts when you are describing a sign, or other modifications of form- except for those, everything you are doing is telling.
Everything is telling.
It isn't so in movies, where almost everything should be visual, but in prose, everything is telling. Even when you go so far towards subtle detail as Raymond Chandler's "A line showed on her jaw", you are still just telling about the line on the jaw. Okay, Chandler didn't tell that she was angry, he told a detail that allows the reader to infer two levels - that her jaw muscle was tightening, and that it was anger that made it happen.
But it's all tell.
The question is, what level of detail are you telling? Is the level of detail appropriate to your story and your audience?
Look at the following sentence, and then decide whether it is showing or telling.
John loved Marsha.
Well?
If you've fallen for the "Show vs Tell" fad, you probably said "tell."
Nope.
The correct answer depends upon context. It is impossible to know without seeing the scene and the surrounding phrasing. Look at it in the following paragraph:
John loved Marsha. John's brother Abel loved Grace. Marsha loved Abel, but had an obvious liking for Grace as well. And then there was Prudence, who thought her brothers would be better off staying away from the brothel completely.
In this case, "John loved Marsha" is a detail regarding the current emotional situation in the family. If you buy the "show vs tell" concept, it is a "show" statement.
Really, any sentence or detail can be a "tell" at one level, while it is a "show" at the next higher hierarchical level. The proper question is, what layer of detail is appropriate to the audience and the purpose of the scene?
More later.
Sunday, November 2, 2008
About Me
Okay, so I finally buckled down and created a blog. My publisher has been after me to do so for, oh, seven months or more, and I kept meaning to, but you know how it is. The cat needs polished and the table needs fed, or something like that.
My name is Dal Jeanis. I write Sci Fi, fantasy, mystery, and some odd combinations of things. For instance, my story published in Strange Worlds of Lunacy was called "Billy Steadman, the Dragon, and the Virgin Bride". It is a comedy dragon western.
Yup.
I won the 2007 Fencon IV short story contest with my story "Spirit of Springtime". I also won Honorable mention at Writers of the Future this year, and I have a novel under contract for publication in 2009.
More about that later.
My name is Dal Jeanis. I write Sci Fi, fantasy, mystery, and some odd combinations of things. For instance, my story published in Strange Worlds of Lunacy was called "Billy Steadman, the Dragon, and the Virgin Bride". It is a comedy dragon western.
Yup.
I won the 2007 Fencon IV short story contest with my story "Spirit of Springtime". I also won Honorable mention at Writers of the Future this year, and I have a novel under contract for publication in 2009.
More about that later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
